Canadian terrorist wins $10.5 million taxpayer lottery
-
http://www.dailywire.com/news/18685/canadas-justin-trudeau-issues-formal-apology-joshua-yasmeh
While the Canadian Parliament is in session (talk about dodgy as fuck), Canada's supreme cuck decided to secretly settle a lawsuit with a self confessed and convicted al-Qaeda terrorist and murderer.
Cuck Trudeau admitted he didn't even have the decency to inform the widow of the US soldier the terrorist killed, that he made the deal. She had to find out through the media.
So, a self confessed and convicted terrorist and war criminal gets a huge pay out because he was sent to prison for his crimes.
FUCKIN WOW.
When I was a kid, I dropped some trash while in Canada. How many billions am I owed for that?
I guess I have to pay because I'm white and male, plus it was unintended because it was during a storm and the hot dog wrapper blew away.
-
Typical. Some loser liberal down voted my post, but didn't have the courage to comment.
-
You've painted this story with an interesting but implausible villain. An entire nation's pride wounded by a boy barely old enough to drive a car? I don't think so. Allow me to propose a more complex and convincing villain.
Omar Khadr, a 15 year old teenager, is taken into US custody after he is found in the rubble of a building that had been destroyed in a battle. Discovering they have a Canadian minor on their hands, the US — believing him to be a source of information — convinces skeptical Canadian authorities not to petition for his return to Canada. The US assures Canada that they would handle everything having to do with him. Canada is hesitant, but agrees, believing that justice will eventually be served. But as the years go by, they began to feel more and more uncomfortable about the situation. Canadians notice he isn't being charged or brought to trial. They find out that what the Americans are doing is using controversial enhanced interrogation techniques on a 15 year old boy, again and again, all for the sake of the War on Terror.
But Khadr is not a terrorist. His age means that Khadr was never in a place to shape his own destiny. While most kids at 15 are pondering their next afterschool activity, Khadr was being taught to handle AK-47s and make improvised explosive devices. From a very early age he was made to live in some of the most dangerous areas in the world, and fed with much extremist nonsense. As many teens would, he did exactly what he was told by his parents. Details of his torture by American military and civilian officials at both Bagram and Guantanamo soon paint a vivid and disturbing picture of what he is subjected to, as uncertainty begins to build over whether in fact he committed any crime at all. Canadian officials were greatly worried, leading to conversations which must have resembled something like the following:
(Canada) "Hey, remember when you took all those prisoners in Afghanistan, one of them was a Canadian boy…remember you told us you'd handle it.... well there still hasn't been a trial. How can you hold him for that long, are you guys sure doing that is legal?"
(USA) "Yeah well these things take time. And dont worry about a thing. Its all legit."
(Canada) "Ok well, are you sure? None of your laws actually say holding him for this long without a trial is ok to do."
(USA) "Yeah, umm well the thing with that is well, we know our laws….and besides, all the info we get from him we're sharing with you so why complain? History will eventually say what were doing here is ok. You dont need to worry."
But the worrying continued. Lawsuits were beginning to be filed, and eventually something would need to be done about Khadr. Instead of the long-promised trial, a plea bargain was offered. It stated that Khadr would be released back to Canada to serve an amount of time, but first he had to confess to everything, including brand new charges that he threw a grenade which killed a medic — a charge which before had never been put to paper. Realizing this was his only way out, he agreed. Unfortunately every fact in the case would be prevented from coming to light because there would never be a trial. This is what the US always wanted. That way, they can tell the story any way they want to.
But not Canada. It's now come to light what Canada agreed to all those years ago. All the while assuring its citizens of its belief in jurisprudence, Canada instead sat on its hands and did nothing while Canadian citizens sat in jail. Canada took its citizen's tax monies, money which could have been spent on building hospitals and improving roads, and spent it on the tacit support of American detention centers for the torture of a teenaged prisoner at Guantanamo. And despite American assurances to the contrary — these actions were never declared legal. It turns out those Canadian worries years ago were justified, because they involved actions which go against the Canadian Charter. There were legal scholars who foresaw Canada's agreeing with the confinement and torture of a child as an issue which would likely come back to haunt them, but those concerns were ignored.
The Canadian government assures its citizens if they are detained and charged with a crime, they would all have access to a fair and impartial trial. Canadian jurisprudence assures Canadian citizens they will be presumed innocent until proven guilty. We now know this isn't always the case. And now everybody is upset at Canada having to pay for its mistake. Think how differently things would have gone, if instead of the previous conversation, the following interaction had occurred between the USA and Canada:
(USA) "We found a Canadian citizen in Afghanistan. We'd like your permission to keep him. He may prove useful."
(Canada) "We're going to have to say no to that request. You see, since Khadr is a Canadian citizen, and especially because he is not an adult, it would be best if we took charge of what happens to him. Its our responsibility in the end, not yours. As there is no precedent for prosecuting child soldiers, we see no need to keep him in Guantanamo. Kindly return him at your earliest convenience. Thank you."
If only the Canadian government had done its job and abided by its own legal doctrines the whole mess would have never happened. There would have been no civil suit and Canadian taxpayers would have had $10.5 million more to spend on Moose shirts, maple syrup and hockey sticks.
-
First off, he is a terrorist and a war criminal. His age has nothing to do with it. Even in weak ass Europe with high ages of responsibility, he's still old enough to be deemed responsible for his own actions.
Why was the settlement done in secret, while parliament was in recess? Trudeau didn't care about the rule of law.
Why weren't the widow and the sole survivor told about it by Trudeau, rather than learning about it by the media? Trudeau has more love for the terrorist/war criminal than he does for the victims.
.9I'm sorry, but I don't buy your poor, put upon victim scenario.
-
First off, he is a terrorist and a war criminal.
According to you the honorable thing for Khadr to have done was to confront his parents on how wrong they were, insist upon explaining to them how the killing of Americans was wrong, and then refuse to join them in their cause of action. I'm curious, what should he have done if that didn't work? How was he supposed to survive after confronting them? When you have a situation where a child literally knows of no other way to live life without his parents and their support, how can you hold that child responsible for simply following the rules?
His age has nothing to do with it.
And yet, just last month you were complaining about Gov Christie's veto of a bill banning child marriage.
Massive homophobe Gov Chris Christie vetoes a law banning child marriage.
Care to explain why you apparently support a ban on child marriage? Is it because you believe that they are too young to make life altering decisions at that age? Is it because of your belief that children at that age are more prone to being taken advantage of? I'll bet whatever your answer is, it would prove very interesting to this part of the discussion.
But setting the age question aside, Canada has a personal responsibility to its own citizens when they commit crimes abroad. Instead of taking charge of the situation, Canada allowed a neighbor state to punish Khadr. A personal point of interest of raphjd's is that people constantly ignore or put off their own taking of responsibility. What does this say about Canada? If the law says someone arrested for killing a person must be brought to trial within a reasonable amount of time, then that law must apply to everyone equally, especially Khadr. Canada ignored that requirement for 15 years. Why shouldnt they be held responsible?
-
According to you, you should always obey your parents. That includes being a terrorist and war criminal as in this case. How far are you wiling to take that? Would you include raping and killing babies?
There is a huge difference between knowing right from wrong as in the case we are discussing, and your parents signing you over to be fucked by some pervert.
Ok, so you are saying that Canada controls the legal system of any country where their citizens commit crimes. You sound like a Brit.
If I commit a crime in a country, I expect to be prosecuted by that country. He should be grateful that the US got him instead of Pakistan.
I noticed you ignored the other questions surrounding the deal itself, such as why it was done in total secret, why it was done only after Parliament was in recess, etc.
-
According to you, you should always obey your parents.
No, I said it was inevitable that children obey their parents because the deck is stacked against them acting independently. Parents control access to food and shelter, something a child might be deprived of if they don't follow along. The incentive is always for the child to follow a parent's directions, and that should count for something if that child does something wrong at the behest of those parents.
There is a huge difference between knowing right from wrong as in the case we are discussing, and your parents signing you over to be fucked by some pervert.
Does a child who is sexually abused by an adult have a solid grasp on what constitutes right and wrong in maintaining a healthy relationship? If so, why are they allowing an unhealthy relationship with an adult? You ask "Didn't Khadr know killing was wrong?" Well, doesn't someone being sexually abused know that abuse is wrong? If they do, then why are they allowing themselves to be abused?
It's because they, as children, do not have the power to shape their own destiny when that destiny is being shaped for them by their abusers, sexual or otherwise. Your expectations for a boy raised by two religious extremists as ought to be having solid views on what is right and wrong are way off base here. It's not about knowing the difference between right and wrong — it's about having the power to change your physical circumstances. Sexual abuse victims often don't have that power, and neither did Khadr. Neither of them should be blamed for it.
Khadr was fucked over by religious extremist parents who took advantage of his unwavering love for a mother and father and twisted that love into hatred — all for their own religiously-perverted reasons. Khadr was their victim as much as anyone else. Instead of being liberated from the hell his parents put him through, Americans took him to another hell - Guantanamo Bay - where he was subjected to more abuse for an amount of time equal to almost as many years as he'd been alive (12 years vs. 15 years at capture).
If I commit a crime in a country, I expect to be prosecuted by that country.
It's precisely because what you just said didn't happen in this case, that Khadr is receiving his "lottery" settlement. As the only military authority in Afghanistan at that time, the US (or if they had deferred in the case, to Canada) should have prosecuted Khadr in a court of law. They never did. They held him for an interminable amount of time and would only release him if he agreed to confess 12 years after the fact.
I noticed you ignored the other questions surrounding the deal itself, such as why it was done in total secret, why it was done only after Parliament was in recess, etc.
Criticising the deal as "secret" is a non-sequitur, because the Canadian court which made the decision which allowed Khadr to receive a settlement was a publically made decision while the apology that went with it was released to the press.
Your upset because the government chose not to propose the settlement publically beforehand and thereby open it up to public debate. You're very naive if you think governments seek out public criticism on their own. The right of the Canadian government not to consult beforehand with the public over every lawsuit it settles is a longstanding practice and it's no surprise that happened here. If anything should be criticized, it's Canada's Harper government (2006-2015) which carries the bulk of blame for kicking the "Khadr can" down the road for so long. Their inaction years ago leads directly to the monetary settlement we see today.
-
So, if my mom told me to rape and murder babies when I was 15yo, you would fight tooth and nail to keep me from getting punished if I did what she told me. BULLSHIT.
Let's see, you are comparing willing throwing a grenade at soldiers vs being raped by some old pervert. You really are desperate to defend a terrorist and war criminal.
So you are butt hurt that Afghanistan didn't punish him. Or are you butt hurt that the US didn't cuck to Canada? Clearly you have no idea how war zones and "police" zones work. They do not operate under the same legal rules as a locality would if you jaywalked.
Trudeau planned it so he would not have to inform Parliament. Anyone who says otherwise is either a liar or an idiot and should be institutionalized. It's also ignorant that he has more respect for the terrorist war criminal than he does for the victims. Trudeau has a history that proves the kind of person he is and what his motives are.
-
So, if my mom told me to rape and murder babies when I was 15yo, you would fight tooth and nail to keep me from getting punished if I did what she told me.
No one told Khadr to rape and murder babies. From the age of 9 Khadr was told that Americans and Canadians were his enemies.
comparing willing throwing a grenade at soldiers vs being raped by some old pervert.
Strong evidence shows that Khadr most likely couldn't have thrown that grenade as he was alleged to have thrown. And besides, Khadr was raped — he was raped psychologically by his parents from the age of 9 to the age of 15 — six long years of psychological abuse for which he was powerless to end. The sexual abuse of one child is no different than the physical or psychological abuse of another child.
Clearly you have no idea how war zones and "police" zones work.
Clearly the Canadian government had no idea how its own Charter works with regards to how prisoners should be kept, or else they wouldn't now be liable for 10 million.
Trudeau planned it so he would not have to inform Parliament.
Harper was the one who planned it by ignoring the issue for the breadth of his administration. Why didn't Harper address this issue when his policy experts were telling him to do so? Why didn't he allow his diplomats to place pressure on the US to hand Khadr over, even when those same diplomats were warning him that not doing so risked violating the Charter?
-
Under international law, he was old enough to be responsible for his actions.
You are extremely desperate to make him not guilty of being a terrorist and war criminal. "he was RAPED mentally"
Again, he is a terrorist and war criminal. He doesn't have the same rights under international law that a jaywalker in his home town would.
Still defending terrorist love Trudeau, I see. That asshole cares more about terrorists than he does about the victims of terrorists, as this incident shows.
-
Under international law, he was old enough to be responsible for his actions.
Which international law would that be? ???
-
Despite the mendacity of your claim, Khadr’s detention was and still is illegal under international law. The law as it deals with child soldiers is described at these three sites. (Feel free to peruse the information found there — for the next time you want to act like you know what you're talking about.)
ANOTHER mistake of yours is blaming Trudeau. By participating in Khadr's detention, it was actually Harper who violated Canada’s own international human rights obligations and Khadr’s Charter rights, not Trudeau. This is how the Supreme Court of Canada ruled more than seven years ago. Even in the face of that ruling, Harper still refused to seek Khadr’s repatriation and instead fought his return. Every other Western country which had prisoners at Guantanamo secured the return of their citizens held there. Canada was the only country which did not do so. Now they are paying the price for that intransigence. Make no mistake: Trudeau may have paid the bill — but it was Harper who incurred the charges.
-
LOL, you are so pathetic.
You are using the definition from the Paris Principles of 2007, which is after the fact.
The International Red Cross refers to an OPTIONAL PROTOCOL to raise the age to 18. They also talk about 15yo soldiers being completely legal.
The Child Soldiers Protocol …....... also refers to inclusion as a war crime in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court “the conscripting or enlisting children under the age of 15 years or using them to participate actively in hostilities in both international and non-international armed conflicts. Why is this? Because "children" are classed those under the age of 15.
I know you're a leftist, but do you really need to try so hard so cuck to terrorists and their lovers?
-
Despite the mendacity of your claim, Khadr’s detention was and still is illegal under international law. The law as it deals with child soldiers is described at these three sites. (Feel free to peruse the information found there — for the next time you want to act like you know what you're talking about.)
ANOTHER mistake of yours is blaming Trudeau. By participating in Khadr's detention, it was actually Harper who violated Canada’s own international human rights obligations and Khadr’s Charter rights, not Trudeau. This is how the Supreme Court of Canada ruled more than seven years ago. Even in the face of that ruling, Harper still refused to seek Khadr’s repatriation and instead fought his return. Every other Western country which had prisoners at Guantanamo secured the return of their citizens held there. Canada was the only country which did not do so. Now they are paying the price for that intransigence. Make no mistake: Trudeau may have paid the bill — but it was Harper who incurred the charges.
Stephen Harper and his 9 year regime destroyed the Conservative Party in Canada. Harper was completely corrupt, and a bumbling asshole.. but people liked him because he looked like Phil Donahue (especially with all the cosmetics he wore) and always had a big smile on his face.
-
Under international law, he was old enough to be responsible for his actions.
Which international law would that be? ???
The same question crossed my mind..
-
Read my earlier post. I explain the international law.
It's the Rome Statute that makes 15yo and up responsible for their own actions, under international law.
-
Read my earlier post. I explain the international law.
It's the Rome Statute that makes 15yo and up responsible for their own actions, under international law.
There you go AGAIN! Putting actual facts and information into the forum! Not fair! The moonbats will be hitting that "Report" button.
-
The Rome Statute only applies to those who force/recruit/etc under 15yo to fight.
The Child Soldier Protocol applies directly to the soldier themselves. If they are under 15, they are not responsible for their actions. If they are 15yo and over, they are responsible for their actions.
The Paris Protocol is not part of international law because only a few countries have signed up to it. As for this thread, it's also after the fact, so it wouldn't apply anyway.
The International Red Cross's Optional Protocol means nothing because it's a voluntary thing with no backing in the international legal system. This is same issue with the Paris Protocol.
All the above is why Canada has not labelled Kadhr as a child soldier. In no way can he qualify as such under international law.
NOTE: The Paris Protocol of 2007 is not related to the Paris Protocol of 2015 on climate change, which dominates most of Google's fist countless pages.
-
Read my earlier post. I explain the international law.
It's the Rome Statute that makes 15yo and up responsible for their own actions, under international law.
There you go AGAIN! Putting actual facts and information into the forum! Not fair! The moonbats will be hitting that "Report" button.
-
What hypocrisy for an American to start quoting international law about a 15 year old boy when they don't sign up to it themselves and force other countries to agree to not prosecute US soldiers for war crimes.
If you don't want to be the victim of attacks in the middle east, get the fuck out and stop invading them. A US soldier invading another country is fair game. They are not victims of a crime. They are casualties of a war they started.
